My pay/pension's inflation-protected, so I'll be all right... won't I?

Click to enlarge - I hope!

No.

Take the illustrated cases above, where take-home income is 1,000 zlotys (or whatever), and you are exceptionally fortunate, in that your benevolent employer/government gives you annual rises that exactly match the rise in inflation in the preceding 12 months.

The trick is, although the pay hike brings you up to the new level of monthly expenditure (at least, up to the point where inflation was re-calculated), it doesn't compensate for the cumulative losses over the year.

This is is one way they can exploit inflation to steal from you, and balance the public finances.

It's us or Them - and inflation's coming

Paul B. Farrell argues - plausibly - that we're in a life-or-death struggle with the financial elite, and they will "win", until the system can no longer sustain them - or us.

A self-deprecating blogger styled "The Anecdotal Economist" suggests a fight back in the form of switching your savings and borrowings away from these enemies of the people.

htp: Jesse, who has joined the Angry Brigade and whose regularly changed sidebar links for reading ("Matière à Réflexion") are a treasure trove.

Meanwhile, John Williams of Shadowstats says:

We will see inflation levels not seen in our lifetime by as early as the end of this year. Eventually we will see liabilities of $65 trillion – more than four times U.S. GDP, more than global GDP. There will be a hyper inflation where the dollar becomes worthless, where the paper is worth more as wall paper than as currency.

htp: Michael Panzner, who also is a great pre-reader for us. Michael says he's switched swides to the inflation believers, but he's too modest - he himself predicted deflation followed by inflation in "Financial Armageddon".

Deflation? You're joking!

Newpaper headlines: we're in deflation for the first time since x years.

Yes, looking at RPI, which takes into account mortgage costs, which have plummeted since the Bank of England cut the rate to its lowest since the Bank started.

No, if you look at non-mortgage costs of living - another newspaper article says pensioners' experience of inflation is something over 12%.

I can't be bothered to find and link the MSM articles. In my view, Guido is right: journalists have become lazy, uncritical copytakers. Now have a look at Zeal's graph of the money supply, the immediate-demand form of which has doubled in 12 months in America.

I still think we're in a sort of re-run of the 70s. Cash will be forced out of accounts and into the market, where it will still lose value, but nothing like as badly as if left rotting in banks and building societies. The Great Theft is on its way.

If you follow Marc Faber, you'll know that he's currently suggesting holding half your wad as cash, since the bubble hasn't really burst yet; but other than that, he's thinking 10% gold and 40% in a combination of resource and emerging market stocks.

The world's average per capita income is $8k - $9k; as globalisation continues the levelling-out process, the East will never be as rich as we once were, but they'll be less poor. For us, on the other hand, this may be the last chance to put something away for our future.

Life goes on!

Yesterday was a fine day. My wife meets our neighbour's mother, wheeling her 15-month-old granddaughter in the pushchair. The child is holding a measuring jug with an animal fridge magnet in it. "What's with the jug?" asks my wife. "That's mine," says grannie, "we've had to take the pussycat for a walk."

Spam

Anybody else having their post comments invaded by Chinese spam with randomised avatar names?

'Swhat I think...

At some point the equity market will start moving higher and keep going, to fantastic levels perhaps, if a serious inflation sets in. The stock markets in the Weimar Republic were spectacular, if one ignored the reality behind the appearance. We think it is far too early in the game for this, but are keeping an open mind to all possibilities.

- Jesse

But before then, I think we have a date with Mr Stockmarket Crunch. I just don't know when that date is.

Time for a Little Socialism?

It is a long-standing argument by US conservatives that progressive taxation is unfair, and that the answer to our economic ills is tax cuts for the wealthy.

In support of that argument, the often-quoted figure is that the top 10% of earners pay 40% of the taxes. That sounds unfair, doesn't it?

According to the IRS, in 2005, the top 10% of earners had 48.5% of the income. The top 1% had 21% of all income.

In other words, the top 10% earned about 8.5 times the average of the bottom 90%, the top 1% earned 26.3 times the average of the other 99%.

In addition, when calculating the taxes per dollar earned, using the conservatives' own figures, the lower 90% pays at a rate which is 1.4 times that of the top 10%.